we_can
01-22 05:03 PM
It took 3 months for my Perm (EB2).
we_can
we_can
wallpaper Keepsake amp; Toss - Los Angeles
LOL123
07-29 03:06 PM
Mine expires on September 9th. Did my finger printing on July 11th . Nothing yet. No LUD ( Soft of Hard).
What are you guys planning to do?
What are you guys planning to do?
pcs
01-20 09:58 PM
Let us send emails & call members. If 154 of us call 10 members each, we can manage about 500 more memebers @ 30 % success.
2011 los-angeles-dodgers-fitted-
greencard_fever
04-08 09:08 PM
Based on the approval trend and VB movement, looks like USCIS is working on cases based on PD order..i know my friends who got their GC recently with PD's from Oct-Dec 2003..so hang on guys we all get there...its common to show our frustation when there is no advance in VB dates...
more...
csvinay
07-19 10:36 PM
First, My LC PD is May 2001 (Yes. May 2001 no typo). RIR remanded to NON-RIR pushed to BEC and stuck there with no recruitment instructions(RI). Obviously that is not only labor I filed but the 2001 labor is the one I'm counting on and mess I'm in is a separate story.
To the topic, folks with later PD able\elgible to file for i485 IS UNFAIR but that is not a result of their action and it is USCIS's fault. So directing the anger towards them IS UNFAIR. Senthil mentioned how RIR was unfair to ppl on NON-RIR. Glad you brought it up because we all know this GC process at every level is so screwed up that nothing makes any sense. At least to me. If you get through to next stage it is seems like a mini-miracle!
One more thing, PD does matter and members do not attach their PD as a signature for no reason. It does not matter a dime if the visas are available i.e it is CURRENT. PD only comes into picture(in I485) when the dates are retrogressed and backlogged. Of course in such scenario PD is HUGE. So it only works in favor of ppl like me if the GC is retrogressed but wishing such a scenario or advising such a scenario would help me is just plain foolish. What we have in our hand(too many i485 going forward) is a humongous problem. In 6 months or later it is gonna loom large and is gonna hurt us very badly if we do not do anything. That should be one of our the main action item and we should seek a way to solve it(recapture etc...)
Rejoice when you get your GC, this Aug 17th development is just a relief for stressed out souls(some). We've won a battle not the war.
Lastly, Please direct you reply to original poster and STOP GENERALIZING certain groups as BEC Folks (i.e BEC folks are insensitive) No one is a spokesman for people stuck in BEC nor should one posters view should be construted as the views of the large. I'm seeing insensitive posts on both sides of the fence. Let us stop spewing hatred by posting our knee jerk reactions.
Let's stop venting and see what we can do. We all know, if everyone was just venting the Aug 17th development would not have happened. So let's act and see what the possibilities are moving forward.
To the topic, folks with later PD able\elgible to file for i485 IS UNFAIR but that is not a result of their action and it is USCIS's fault. So directing the anger towards them IS UNFAIR. Senthil mentioned how RIR was unfair to ppl on NON-RIR. Glad you brought it up because we all know this GC process at every level is so screwed up that nothing makes any sense. At least to me. If you get through to next stage it is seems like a mini-miracle!
One more thing, PD does matter and members do not attach their PD as a signature for no reason. It does not matter a dime if the visas are available i.e it is CURRENT. PD only comes into picture(in I485) when the dates are retrogressed and backlogged. Of course in such scenario PD is HUGE. So it only works in favor of ppl like me if the GC is retrogressed but wishing such a scenario or advising such a scenario would help me is just plain foolish. What we have in our hand(too many i485 going forward) is a humongous problem. In 6 months or later it is gonna loom large and is gonna hurt us very badly if we do not do anything. That should be one of our the main action item and we should seek a way to solve it(recapture etc...)
Rejoice when you get your GC, this Aug 17th development is just a relief for stressed out souls(some). We've won a battle not the war.
Lastly, Please direct you reply to original poster and STOP GENERALIZING certain groups as BEC Folks (i.e BEC folks are insensitive) No one is a spokesman for people stuck in BEC nor should one posters view should be construted as the views of the large. I'm seeing insensitive posts on both sides of the fence. Let us stop spewing hatred by posting our knee jerk reactions.
Let's stop venting and see what we can do. We all know, if everyone was just venting the Aug 17th development would not have happened. So let's act and see what the possibilities are moving forward.
americandesi
04-07 01:45 PM
I was wondering if any one in the core or other members think about the next step towards getting citizenship after passing the hurdles of getting the green card. If a person is here for 10 years and then get his green card (average period), then he need to wait for another 5 years to get the citizenship. 15 years for this process in a person's life is too much.
IV Core can push or lobby for a law which can make the person a US citizen, if he is living in US for 10 years legally without any issues and paying taxes for the entire period. It is just my idea.
A similar concern was raised during the CIS Ombudsman teleconference held on August 16, 2007. But nothing conclusive came out of it. Refer http://www.murthy.com/news/n_ombsci.html
"Other questions included the concern that time spent waiting for the adjudication of one's green card application is not being counted against the standard five-year physical presence requirement to qualify for U.S. citizenship."
IV Core can push or lobby for a law which can make the person a US citizen, if he is living in US for 10 years legally without any issues and paying taxes for the entire period. It is just my idea.
A similar concern was raised during the CIS Ombudsman teleconference held on August 16, 2007. But nothing conclusive came out of it. Refer http://www.murthy.com/news/n_ombsci.html
"Other questions included the concern that time spent waiting for the adjudication of one's green card application is not being counted against the standard five-year physical presence requirement to qualify for U.S. citizenship."
more...
santb1975
04-07 12:06 AM
NolaIndian32
santb1975
gsc999
We need 147 more....Is the Goal challenging enough for us?
santb1975
gsc999
We need 147 more....Is the Goal challenging enough for us?
2010 the Los Angeles Dodgers.
whatamidoinghere
09-01 01:20 PM
Congratulations to all who got their approvals in Sept.
I really need your advise , it seems my case is frozen and no one is looking at it.
My priority date is Aug , 2003 ,
And RD = Jun 17 2007
and ND = Jun 18 2098
My dates were within processing dates for 3 months in 2007, 9 months in 2008 and 3+ months in 2009 but still no one is adjudicating my case.
I tried following
- Enquiry thru Aila
- Service request their toll free number.
- Enquiry thru office of local senator
- Enquiry thru Ombudusman's office.
- Enquiry using info pass
All of these enquiries just send very standard formatted response suggesting we are working on your case get back in 6 months.
Any suggestions?
Please advise.
Thanks.
If your ND is 2098, then you wont get it... If it is 2008, probably lawsuit is the way to go since it appears that you have exhausted even the local senator option
I really need your advise , it seems my case is frozen and no one is looking at it.
My priority date is Aug , 2003 ,
And RD = Jun 17 2007
and ND = Jun 18 2098
My dates were within processing dates for 3 months in 2007, 9 months in 2008 and 3+ months in 2009 but still no one is adjudicating my case.
I tried following
- Enquiry thru Aila
- Service request their toll free number.
- Enquiry thru office of local senator
- Enquiry thru Ombudusman's office.
- Enquiry using info pass
All of these enquiries just send very standard formatted response suggesting we are working on your case get back in 6 months.
Any suggestions?
Please advise.
Thanks.
If your ND is 2098, then you wont get it... If it is 2008, probably lawsuit is the way to go since it appears that you have exhausted even the local senator option
more...
rp0lol
01-17 04:16 PM
:) :) :)
hair Los Angeles Dodgers New Era
msyedy
02-02 02:24 PM
Nice one.
well here our patience has made us patients of retrogression. There are no fruits visible to us!! :D
Happy Friday!!
It will come from your mouth that our reforms have been passed. This is all what we hope and """ We are not forcing you get it done"" as few of the members think.
You will be Yamdooth or the you will be the God of Savoir (according to Hindu religion.:D :D
well here our patience has made us patients of retrogression. There are no fruits visible to us!! :D
Happy Friday!!
It will come from your mouth that our reforms have been passed. This is all what we hope and """ We are not forcing you get it done"" as few of the members think.
You will be Yamdooth or the you will be the God of Savoir (according to Hindu religion.:D :D
more...
iyappanp
08-17 07:00 PM
I too efiled on May 22nd and FP on June 19th. There is no update in my case too. I have an infopass appointment on Thursday. I will keep u guys updated
hot New Era Custom Los Angeles
Totoro
03-19 06:57 PM
As some of you know, I have been working with news media, government leaders, and immigration lawyers over the past year because of the stimulus debacle. As a result, I have developed some strong contacts in government. I will be meeting some congressional immigration staffers in the next few days and I have developed a list of issues to discuss. If you want to post your own issues, feel free to do so in this thread and I will add them to the list. These are the same people who helped get the last stimulus bill changed in our favor, so they do have influence.
PLEASE be brief - bullet points would be good.
Also links to articles to support your concerns are welcome. I will put together a package to hand out at the meeting.
I thought of posting a poll on this thread, but decided it would be better to leave the discussion open ended.
PLEASE be brief - bullet points would be good.
Also links to articles to support your concerns are welcome. I will put together a package to hand out at the meeting.
I thought of posting a poll on this thread, but decided it would be better to leave the discussion open ended.
more...
house Los Angeles Dodgers 27 Matt
eb3retro
07-14 11:49 AM
might be a good question for USCIS through ombudsman as to how exactly the spill over happens, especially for eb3?
EB3 ROW is at Jun 2004. But as per latest USCIS inventory, EB3 ROW pending 485's are around 48,000. Visa numbers available every year for EB3 is approximately 42k. If you deduct the backlogged EB3 countries (4x3000) visa numbers, the total comes down to 30k for EB3 ROW. So EB3 ROW should become current or atleast Jul 07 in another 1.5 years. If this is not going to happen, it means they are diverting the EB3 numbers to some other categories.
my 2 cents
Note : If EB3 ROW has 30k visas per year and pending EB3 ROW 485's are only 50k.. why it is still hanging in 2004. God only knows !!
EB3 ROW is at Jun 2004. But as per latest USCIS inventory, EB3 ROW pending 485's are around 48,000. Visa numbers available every year for EB3 is approximately 42k. If you deduct the backlogged EB3 countries (4x3000) visa numbers, the total comes down to 30k for EB3 ROW. So EB3 ROW should become current or atleast Jul 07 in another 1.5 years. If this is not going to happen, it means they are diverting the EB3 numbers to some other categories.
my 2 cents
Note : If EB3 ROW has 30k visas per year and pending EB3 ROW 485's are only 50k.. why it is still hanging in 2004. God only knows !!
tattoo Los Angeles Dodgers - Any
mpadapa
06-09 10:54 AM
We need active participation from members for the action item listed on this thread. CHC member are taking a very hard stand on the 3 bills introduced by Lofgren. If members (esp. constituents) don't call in large numbers and urge the CHC members to support the bills. The 3 bills may not even see the house floor. CHC members want only one immigration bill (CIR), nothing else is accepted.
Please ask u'r friends and colleagues (who are constituents of CHC lawmakers) to participate in this crucial action item.
Please ask u'r friends and colleagues (who are constituents of CHC lawmakers) to participate in this crucial action item.
more...
pictures MLB Los Angeles Dodgers cap-12
Canadian_Dream
01-24 05:18 AM
Slumdog,
You did exactly what you have accused others of(that is bashing). You could have simply opined, put your point through and left. But you went further than that, I don't understand what is the whole idea of one group passing judgment on others. There are EB2 better than EB3 threads, the labor substitutes vs. honest to God super qualified deserving PERM filers, then there is US educated vs. non US educated and now renters vs. home owner and savers vs. big spenders. What I fail to understand is, if you have to make your point please do so but keep your opinion about others to yourself on your blogs or you personal websites.
Now coming to the point:
These people do not want to buy houses not because they cannot afford or they want to play safe. They just don’t want to spend. All they care is Saving, Saving, saving their entire life & keep filling their bank balances. Often strangely both couples are working.
What's wrong if a couple is saving and filling their bank accounts ? Tell me one thing that is wrong about being frugal ? May be they are saving to for their future education or for their kids education ? For a small business ? or Simply retiring at 40 ? or May be having a bank account full of money gives them same pleasure that you get from your McMansion ? Or they simply want to live debt free and sleep well at night. So unless I have some material possession to show for my money, I am wasting it all away ? Isn't it ?
These are people who want to live in cheapest rent (even with double income) in single bedroom & they don’t mind children sleeping in their bed room. They don’t mind sending their children to low grade schools.
If you want to throw your hard earned money and pay the highest possible rents, please go ahead. Don't preach. Public education is free and private school are not cheap so please explain what do you mean by "Low Grade Schools" ? Besides renters can choose any school they want by simply renting in the best school district at all grades. Your point doesn't make sense. Besides living frugally gives your kids a better shot at quality education then overspending on unnecessary things.
Their intention to come into this country is only for earning money & because they don’t have high ambitions & all they care is saving & not spending, they just think of saving in all possible ways.
Making money is a perfectly fine ambition is a capitalistic country. May be their ambition is to save early and then provide the best for their family by working part time in later years. Please define "high ambition" ? Buying a high rise condo ? McMansion in a suburb ? Would that instantly qualify me to be an ambitious achiever ?
They call themselves rich because of bank balances but in my
It doesn't matter what your views are, if they have money in the bank they are actually "rich". If they can maintain the same life style in good times and bad times, they are rich. They can provide food, shelter and health insurance for their family during tough times, they are rich. Unfortunately your views will NOT pay bills, so you can distribute them freely on this forum all you want it won't make a difference.
They call themselves rich because of bank balances but in my view they are poor than most of homeless guys who live out streets.
Don't insult someone just because he/she is homeless. People do go through tough times and not everyone is fortunate to have smooth sailing all along. You said have seen it all but you haven't learned to be humble !!! May be you ain't seen nothing yet. Start with "Pursuit of Happiness" the movie that is.
Category 2: Money Money Money
These people do not want to buy houses not because they cannot afford or they want to play safe. They just don’t want to spend. All they care is Saving, Saving, saving their entire life & keep filling their bank balances. Often strangely both couples are working. These are people who want to live in cheapest rent (even with double income) in single bedroom & they don’t mind children sleeping in their bed room. They don’t mind sending their children to low grade schools. They don’t mind their in-Laws or parents when they visit sleeping in living room on the floor. Their intention to come into this country is only for earning money & because they don’t have high ambitions & all they care is saving & not spending, they just think of saving in all possible ways. They call themselves rich because of bank balances but in my view they are poor than most of homeless guys who live out streets.
Category 3: Unaffordable
They simply cannot afford due to multiple reasons like single Income, financial obligations etc.
Continuation..... Next Page...
You did exactly what you have accused others of(that is bashing). You could have simply opined, put your point through and left. But you went further than that, I don't understand what is the whole idea of one group passing judgment on others. There are EB2 better than EB3 threads, the labor substitutes vs. honest to God super qualified deserving PERM filers, then there is US educated vs. non US educated and now renters vs. home owner and savers vs. big spenders. What I fail to understand is, if you have to make your point please do so but keep your opinion about others to yourself on your blogs or you personal websites.
Now coming to the point:
These people do not want to buy houses not because they cannot afford or they want to play safe. They just don’t want to spend. All they care is Saving, Saving, saving their entire life & keep filling their bank balances. Often strangely both couples are working.
What's wrong if a couple is saving and filling their bank accounts ? Tell me one thing that is wrong about being frugal ? May be they are saving to for their future education or for their kids education ? For a small business ? or Simply retiring at 40 ? or May be having a bank account full of money gives them same pleasure that you get from your McMansion ? Or they simply want to live debt free and sleep well at night. So unless I have some material possession to show for my money, I am wasting it all away ? Isn't it ?
These are people who want to live in cheapest rent (even with double income) in single bedroom & they don’t mind children sleeping in their bed room. They don’t mind sending their children to low grade schools.
If you want to throw your hard earned money and pay the highest possible rents, please go ahead. Don't preach. Public education is free and private school are not cheap so please explain what do you mean by "Low Grade Schools" ? Besides renters can choose any school they want by simply renting in the best school district at all grades. Your point doesn't make sense. Besides living frugally gives your kids a better shot at quality education then overspending on unnecessary things.
Their intention to come into this country is only for earning money & because they don’t have high ambitions & all they care is saving & not spending, they just think of saving in all possible ways.
Making money is a perfectly fine ambition is a capitalistic country. May be their ambition is to save early and then provide the best for their family by working part time in later years. Please define "high ambition" ? Buying a high rise condo ? McMansion in a suburb ? Would that instantly qualify me to be an ambitious achiever ?
They call themselves rich because of bank balances but in my
It doesn't matter what your views are, if they have money in the bank they are actually "rich". If they can maintain the same life style in good times and bad times, they are rich. They can provide food, shelter and health insurance for their family during tough times, they are rich. Unfortunately your views will NOT pay bills, so you can distribute them freely on this forum all you want it won't make a difference.
They call themselves rich because of bank balances but in my view they are poor than most of homeless guys who live out streets.
Don't insult someone just because he/she is homeless. People do go through tough times and not everyone is fortunate to have smooth sailing all along. You said have seen it all but you haven't learned to be humble !!! May be you ain't seen nothing yet. Start with "Pursuit of Happiness" the movie that is.
Category 2: Money Money Money
These people do not want to buy houses not because they cannot afford or they want to play safe. They just don’t want to spend. All they care is Saving, Saving, saving their entire life & keep filling their bank balances. Often strangely both couples are working. These are people who want to live in cheapest rent (even with double income) in single bedroom & they don’t mind children sleeping in their bed room. They don’t mind sending their children to low grade schools. They don’t mind their in-Laws or parents when they visit sleeping in living room on the floor. Their intention to come into this country is only for earning money & because they don’t have high ambitions & all they care is saving & not spending, they just think of saving in all possible ways. They call themselves rich because of bank balances but in my view they are poor than most of homeless guys who live out streets.
Category 3: Unaffordable
They simply cannot afford due to multiple reasons like single Income, financial obligations etc.
Continuation..... Next Page...
dresses Los Angeles Dodgers MLB Empire
GCNirvana007
09-03 09:52 AM
:) Got approval today.
first received CPO email and later received welcome email.
PD:JUNE 2004
RD:08/25/2007
EB2 INDIA
GC Approved : 9/2/2009
Thanks everyone who helped me in the long journey .......
Hope you get yours soon. :)
Everyone who got CPO e-mail got welcome e-mail too?. Does it matter?.
first received CPO email and later received welcome email.
PD:JUNE 2004
RD:08/25/2007
EB2 INDIA
GC Approved : 9/2/2009
Thanks everyone who helped me in the long journey .......
Hope you get yours soon. :)
Everyone who got CPO e-mail got welcome e-mail too?. Does it matter?.
more...
makeup Los Angeles Dodgers MLB
srinivasa
04-19 10:03 AM
Hi
My wife have H1B approved in 2005.Her stamping was refused on 226(g) section.She came to u.s.a on H4.Now her employer has applied for premium H4 to H1 transfer for her.
We didnot hear anything from them.It is already 2 weeks.
If it goes through.Does she need to go back for stamping to start working.
How the things will be?
How long the process will take (transfer)
If the attorney can help me in this,it is really great and appreicable
thanks
srinivasa
My wife have H1B approved in 2005.Her stamping was refused on 226(g) section.She came to u.s.a on H4.Now her employer has applied for premium H4 to H1 transfer for her.
We didnot hear anything from them.It is already 2 weeks.
If it goes through.Does she need to go back for stamping to start working.
How the things will be?
How long the process will take (transfer)
If the attorney can help me in this,it is really great and appreicable
thanks
srinivasa
girlfriend Los Angeles Dodgers Layout -
Kodi
05-08 12:17 PM
That's tough. I just filed today. I really thought the max wait would be 3 months but you said its already been 3 months. My H1 is expiring Dec 1, 2007.
hairstyles Los Angeles Dodgers New Era
trueguy
09-24 01:00 PM
CIR !!!! --> Not until 2011 at least based on the current political climate, etc IMO.
For EB3 (All countries) to see some light, the changes made recently to the allocation of excess visa, spill over and also to over subscribed countries need to be revisited. Not sure, what triggered USCIS / DOS to revise the interpretation after so many years. Did IV had any role on this, or not .. do not know.. I ask this as based on all forum updates, IV appears to have little success in the Admin Fix area. I have posted this so many times in various threads and did not get an answer, may be there is none. If the interpretation was somewhat like before, EB2 /3 both would have got the spillover... and all would have benefited in the order of PD. Now with the new interpretation. all excess / spillover visa just goes only to 2 countries (EB2 India / China). Looking at the latest numbers based on USCIS website, China has far less cases compared in India based on the cut-off date, which is good for India (EB2), as they now consume a big chunk of the numbers and rest are left out for now. I am not sure, what is opinion on this from folks from ROW (EB3) on this. Does IV has any comment on this... Having said this, I have nothing against Eb2 or EB2 India specific, and not getting into the argument whether or not EB2 need to given much preference.. (Well DOS allocated on 28.6% of total numbers to both this category). This is just my concern on the changes to interpretation for the visa spill over process.
I agree with you completely. No rules were changed anywhere but DOS/USCIS changed the interpretation of spillover. Who approved this changed on whose authority?
In worst case, they should be giving equal share of spillover to both categories purely based on PD. So if 40K numbers are spilling over from EB1 and EB2-ROW then EB2-I/C should get 20K and EB3-ALL should get 20K.
For EB3 (All countries) to see some light, the changes made recently to the allocation of excess visa, spill over and also to over subscribed countries need to be revisited. Not sure, what triggered USCIS / DOS to revise the interpretation after so many years. Did IV had any role on this, or not .. do not know.. I ask this as based on all forum updates, IV appears to have little success in the Admin Fix area. I have posted this so many times in various threads and did not get an answer, may be there is none. If the interpretation was somewhat like before, EB2 /3 both would have got the spillover... and all would have benefited in the order of PD. Now with the new interpretation. all excess / spillover visa just goes only to 2 countries (EB2 India / China). Looking at the latest numbers based on USCIS website, China has far less cases compared in India based on the cut-off date, which is good for India (EB2), as they now consume a big chunk of the numbers and rest are left out for now. I am not sure, what is opinion on this from folks from ROW (EB3) on this. Does IV has any comment on this... Having said this, I have nothing against Eb2 or EB2 India specific, and not getting into the argument whether or not EB2 need to given much preference.. (Well DOS allocated on 28.6% of total numbers to both this category). This is just my concern on the changes to interpretation for the visa spill over process.
I agree with you completely. No rules were changed anywhere but DOS/USCIS changed the interpretation of spillover. Who approved this changed on whose authority?
In worst case, they should be giving equal share of spillover to both categories purely based on PD. So if 40K numbers are spilling over from EB1 and EB2-ROW then EB2-I/C should get 20K and EB3-ALL should get 20K.
breddy2000
01-14 10:07 AM
Wall Street's Rigged Casino
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/barry/2009/0113.html
Last year was certainly a turbulent one for investors. Not only did good assets and companies sell off with bad, but the very integrity of the U.S. markets was brought into question. Financial firms spend millions of dollars convincing the average citizen that investing in stocks is necessary and prudent, yet the playing field is far from level. Fraud, naked shorting and other forms of manipulation are now endemic to the American markets. As Overstock's lawyer, John O'Quinn points out, “You have more chance to be treated fairly in a casino in Vegas.” How can you invest if you can't trust the system?
Jim Puplava, Mike Schneider and a few other journalists have exposed the prevalence of naked shorting on Wall Street. While selling short is a legitimate activity, naked shorting occurs when parties sell shares they don't own and don't intend to borrow, causing more shares to be traded than actually exist. Approximately 7.5% of the trades reported by the DTCC fail to deliver each day, and this agency is private and not at all transparent. Furthermore, 96% of all stock transactions are completed outside the official system and are totally unregulated.
Regulation SHO was enacted in 2005 by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to supposedly eliminate chronic settlement failures by forcing brokers to close out positions after thirteen consecutive trading days. However the regulation doesn't cover small and micro cap companies, or failures to deliver (FTDs) that are below a certain numerical threshold. Market makers were exempt from this regulation until last fall, and old FTDs were allowed to remain open. Some corporations remained on the threshold list for over a year consecutively with no relief from the SEC.
Chairman Cox admitted in July 2006 that there were many large loopholes in Regulation SHO which allowed predatory shorting to continue. Few firms were investigated, and even those brokers who were caught paid minimal fines. Almost nothing was done until naked shorting threatened “the stability of financial institutions,” according to Cox. In July 2008, the SEC banned naked shorting of 19 select financial firms. With this rule and the subsequent emergency order banning all short selling in 799 financial institutions, Cox admitted that naked shorting was a serious problem, but the SEC would only enforce the rules for certain institutions that deserved the effort.
The Commission has demonstrated where its real allegiance lies, and it’s not with the small investor. For years, hedge funds, brokerages, and investment banks soaked up fat profits by naked shorting promising companies to death. These shorts never have to be covered if the company is delisted and goes bankrupt, so it’s a very lucrative criminal practice. When some of these same corporations that preyed on small cap stocks suffered share price drops due to their hideous balance sheets, the SEC moved in to give them special protection.
Even with some of the loopholes closed, market manipulation still goes on. As Allan Young points out on his website, naked shorting is in effect another derivative like credit default swaps or mortgage backed securities. Predatory brokers can sell more shares than exist, as if they are buying a put (a bet that prices will go down). Sell enough shares and you can ensure your bet is correct. These brokers can later close out their naked shorts and avoid censure from the SEC.
Although the most egregious violations of the naked short rules have been eliminated, with corporations like Overstock now off the naked short list, much of the damage has already been done. Many solid businesses have been naked shorted out of existence, leading to unemployment and destruction of wealth for millions of taxpayers. U.S. citizens are angry and scared as they watch their stock portfolios shrink, and see their pensions in jeopardy.
This begs the question as to why the U.S. government would prop the markets up on one hand using the Plunge Protection Team, while allowing naked shorting on the other which pushes the share prices down. I can only conclude that the system is designed to redistribute wealth from small investors to elite bankers and hedge fund managers. Perhaps the stock markets were allowed to decline so the politically connected shorts could cover profitably. With the close relationship between Wall Street, regulators, Congress, and the Treasury Department full of former Goldman Sachs executives, it's clear that the average worker with retirement money invested in the market is at an extreme disadvantage.
The SEC suffered another embarassment with the revelation that Bernard Madoff ran a US$50 billion Ponzi scheme disguised as a hedge fund for several years. Only a tip from Madoff's sons to the FBI unraveled the scheme. In fact, the SEC investigated Madoff's company eight times over more than a decade and failed to find any fraud. A former SEC attorney is now married to Madoff's niece, raising doubts about his objectivity in examining Madoff's books. Even when Harry Markopoulos, a private whistleblower, produced evidence that Madoff's trading results could not be replicated, no one at the SEC took him seriously.
Congress has been quick to blame Commissioner Cox, a former colleague for the Madoff scandal. However, missteps and inadequate enforcement predate Cox, who has only run the SEC since August 2005.
Obama's pick to replace Cox, Mary Schapiro has many flaws of her own. She previously appointed one of Madoff's sons to a disciplinary board, making her judgement look very poor. Schapiro is currently chief of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, a self regulating body which has been even less willing than usual to crack down on Wall Street abuses during her tenure. She ran the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) under President Clinton, an agency that has been unable or unwilling to perceive the manipulation in the precious metals markets while pursuing collusion in other commodities. Schapiro stated she was inspired to pursue a regulatory career by watching the Hunt brothers' silver moves, so we know where her biases lie.
As an analyst, I spend hours each week poring over balance sheets, and reading financial statements of companies I may want to recommend to my subscribers. My task is made very difficult by the widespread financial fraud. While Madoff's results were too good to be true, other forms of deception are extremely hard to detect. Satyam is the latest scandal to hit Wall Street. Although the corporation is headquartered in India, Satyam has Fortune 500 clients in the U.S. and is listed on the NYSE. It has to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley regulations just like any American company, rules that are supposed to enforce honesty and transparency. Satyam – which is Sanskrit for truth - was awarded the Golden Peacock award for corporate governance just three months ago, in an amazing bit of irony.
With all these scandals, no wonder Merrill Lynch reports that rich customers are demanding gold coins and bars instead of shares in “paper gold” like ETFs. Credible stories indicate that the COMEX warehouses are experiencing record activity as receipt holders seek delivery of their gold. Brokers are apparently attempting to discourage this activity to squelch metal demand. When trust is eroded, people naturally seek safety in an asset without counterparty risk like gold.
If you are a stock investor despite all these perils, how to you separate the wheat from the chaff? First you have to find industries with impeccable fundamentals. While commodities suffered greatly in 2008, I believe they will see a strong rebound in 2009.
Second, check the track record of management and look for any hints of impropriety. Third, read the financial statements and look for unnecessarily complicated structures or conflicts of interest: these are red flags. Fourth, if results seem unbelievably excellent, they may be fictional. Fifth, while you can no longer take delivery of shares in the United States, you can contact the companies you invest in to determine if you are on the list of legitimate shareholders or a victim of naked shorting. Sixth, diversify into several different companies so if one is fraudulent you don't lose all your money. With the danger inherent in stocks, I recommend only investing capital you can afford to lose.
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/barry/2009/0113.html
Last year was certainly a turbulent one for investors. Not only did good assets and companies sell off with bad, but the very integrity of the U.S. markets was brought into question. Financial firms spend millions of dollars convincing the average citizen that investing in stocks is necessary and prudent, yet the playing field is far from level. Fraud, naked shorting and other forms of manipulation are now endemic to the American markets. As Overstock's lawyer, John O'Quinn points out, “You have more chance to be treated fairly in a casino in Vegas.” How can you invest if you can't trust the system?
Jim Puplava, Mike Schneider and a few other journalists have exposed the prevalence of naked shorting on Wall Street. While selling short is a legitimate activity, naked shorting occurs when parties sell shares they don't own and don't intend to borrow, causing more shares to be traded than actually exist. Approximately 7.5% of the trades reported by the DTCC fail to deliver each day, and this agency is private and not at all transparent. Furthermore, 96% of all stock transactions are completed outside the official system and are totally unregulated.
Regulation SHO was enacted in 2005 by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to supposedly eliminate chronic settlement failures by forcing brokers to close out positions after thirteen consecutive trading days. However the regulation doesn't cover small and micro cap companies, or failures to deliver (FTDs) that are below a certain numerical threshold. Market makers were exempt from this regulation until last fall, and old FTDs were allowed to remain open. Some corporations remained on the threshold list for over a year consecutively with no relief from the SEC.
Chairman Cox admitted in July 2006 that there were many large loopholes in Regulation SHO which allowed predatory shorting to continue. Few firms were investigated, and even those brokers who were caught paid minimal fines. Almost nothing was done until naked shorting threatened “the stability of financial institutions,” according to Cox. In July 2008, the SEC banned naked shorting of 19 select financial firms. With this rule and the subsequent emergency order banning all short selling in 799 financial institutions, Cox admitted that naked shorting was a serious problem, but the SEC would only enforce the rules for certain institutions that deserved the effort.
The Commission has demonstrated where its real allegiance lies, and it’s not with the small investor. For years, hedge funds, brokerages, and investment banks soaked up fat profits by naked shorting promising companies to death. These shorts never have to be covered if the company is delisted and goes bankrupt, so it’s a very lucrative criminal practice. When some of these same corporations that preyed on small cap stocks suffered share price drops due to their hideous balance sheets, the SEC moved in to give them special protection.
Even with some of the loopholes closed, market manipulation still goes on. As Allan Young points out on his website, naked shorting is in effect another derivative like credit default swaps or mortgage backed securities. Predatory brokers can sell more shares than exist, as if they are buying a put (a bet that prices will go down). Sell enough shares and you can ensure your bet is correct. These brokers can later close out their naked shorts and avoid censure from the SEC.
Although the most egregious violations of the naked short rules have been eliminated, with corporations like Overstock now off the naked short list, much of the damage has already been done. Many solid businesses have been naked shorted out of existence, leading to unemployment and destruction of wealth for millions of taxpayers. U.S. citizens are angry and scared as they watch their stock portfolios shrink, and see their pensions in jeopardy.
This begs the question as to why the U.S. government would prop the markets up on one hand using the Plunge Protection Team, while allowing naked shorting on the other which pushes the share prices down. I can only conclude that the system is designed to redistribute wealth from small investors to elite bankers and hedge fund managers. Perhaps the stock markets were allowed to decline so the politically connected shorts could cover profitably. With the close relationship between Wall Street, regulators, Congress, and the Treasury Department full of former Goldman Sachs executives, it's clear that the average worker with retirement money invested in the market is at an extreme disadvantage.
The SEC suffered another embarassment with the revelation that Bernard Madoff ran a US$50 billion Ponzi scheme disguised as a hedge fund for several years. Only a tip from Madoff's sons to the FBI unraveled the scheme. In fact, the SEC investigated Madoff's company eight times over more than a decade and failed to find any fraud. A former SEC attorney is now married to Madoff's niece, raising doubts about his objectivity in examining Madoff's books. Even when Harry Markopoulos, a private whistleblower, produced evidence that Madoff's trading results could not be replicated, no one at the SEC took him seriously.
Congress has been quick to blame Commissioner Cox, a former colleague for the Madoff scandal. However, missteps and inadequate enforcement predate Cox, who has only run the SEC since August 2005.
Obama's pick to replace Cox, Mary Schapiro has many flaws of her own. She previously appointed one of Madoff's sons to a disciplinary board, making her judgement look very poor. Schapiro is currently chief of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, a self regulating body which has been even less willing than usual to crack down on Wall Street abuses during her tenure. She ran the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) under President Clinton, an agency that has been unable or unwilling to perceive the manipulation in the precious metals markets while pursuing collusion in other commodities. Schapiro stated she was inspired to pursue a regulatory career by watching the Hunt brothers' silver moves, so we know where her biases lie.
As an analyst, I spend hours each week poring over balance sheets, and reading financial statements of companies I may want to recommend to my subscribers. My task is made very difficult by the widespread financial fraud. While Madoff's results were too good to be true, other forms of deception are extremely hard to detect. Satyam is the latest scandal to hit Wall Street. Although the corporation is headquartered in India, Satyam has Fortune 500 clients in the U.S. and is listed on the NYSE. It has to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley regulations just like any American company, rules that are supposed to enforce honesty and transparency. Satyam – which is Sanskrit for truth - was awarded the Golden Peacock award for corporate governance just three months ago, in an amazing bit of irony.
With all these scandals, no wonder Merrill Lynch reports that rich customers are demanding gold coins and bars instead of shares in “paper gold” like ETFs. Credible stories indicate that the COMEX warehouses are experiencing record activity as receipt holders seek delivery of their gold. Brokers are apparently attempting to discourage this activity to squelch metal demand. When trust is eroded, people naturally seek safety in an asset without counterparty risk like gold.
If you are a stock investor despite all these perils, how to you separate the wheat from the chaff? First you have to find industries with impeccable fundamentals. While commodities suffered greatly in 2008, I believe they will see a strong rebound in 2009.
Second, check the track record of management and look for any hints of impropriety. Third, read the financial statements and look for unnecessarily complicated structures or conflicts of interest: these are red flags. Fourth, if results seem unbelievably excellent, they may be fictional. Fifth, while you can no longer take delivery of shares in the United States, you can contact the companies you invest in to determine if you are on the list of legitimate shareholders or a victim of naked shorting. Sixth, diversify into several different companies so if one is fraudulent you don't lose all your money. With the danger inherent in stocks, I recommend only investing capital you can afford to lose.
tonyHK12
09-30 08:29 AM
I decided to join you as a monthly Donor today.
It looks like your organization is the only one doing anything concrete to help legal immigrants. I had trouble finding support on other immigration sites.
This is request to other members and forum browsers, guests to also support their effort.
The recession has been tough, but if I had to choose, my immigration is more important to me than cable TV.
It looks like your organization is the only one doing anything concrete to help legal immigrants. I had trouble finding support on other immigration sites.
This is request to other members and forum browsers, guests to also support their effort.
The recession has been tough, but if I had to choose, my immigration is more important to me than cable TV.
0 comments:
Post a Comment